A decade after a group of smokers from Massachusetts sued Philip Morris USA to try to force the cigarette maker to pay for lung cancer screenings, the case will finally be heard by a jury.
Smokers in the class-action lawsuit allege Philip Morris manufactured a defective cigarette knowing it could have made a safer product with fewer carcinogens.
They are not seeking money, but instead want to compel Philip Morris to pay for highly detailed, three-dimensional chest scans that can detect signs of early-stage lung cancer that may be too small to show up on traditional X-rays.
The closely watched case heads to trial this week in federal court in Boston.
The jury will be asked to decide whether Philip Morris made Marlboro cigarettes that are unreasonably dangerous. If the jury finds in favor of the smokers, a second phase will be held to determine how a medical monitoring program will be administered.
No smokers are expected to testify during the first phase. Instead, it will be a trial of dueling experts.
The plaintiffs plan to call a former Philip Morris employee to testify that feasible alternative designs of Marlboros have existed for decades. They also plan to call a psychologist who will testify that given a choice between Marlboros or a safer cigarette, a non-addicted, informed person would choose the safer alternative.
Philip Morris is expected to call experts in cigarette design and marketing who are likely to testify that the company’s lower-tar and lower-nicotine cigarettes — on the market since the late 1970s —have failed to gain a significant market share among any group of smoker.
Richard Daynard, a law professor at Northeastern University and anti-smoking activist, said past lawsuits seeking to force tobacco companies to provide medical monitoring have failed. But Daynard said he believes the Massachusetts case has a stronger chance of succeeding because recent studies have found that the sophisticated screening can save lives.
“What’s happened is you have better technology which captures the tumors at a much earlier stage where there’s a very good chance that if you get them that the person … is probably not going to die from it,” Daynard said.
A Philip Morris spokesman declined to comment, and lawyers for the company did not respond to messages.
In court documents, the company denied that its cigarettes are defectively designed and argued that three-dimensional chest scans would not be effective or necessary for every person covered by the lawsuit.
The case covers Massachusetts smokers who, as of February 2013, were at least 50, had at least a 20 pack-year history of smoking Marlboros and have not been diagnosed with lung cancer. Pack-years are calculated by multiplying the average number of packs per day by the number of years a person has smoked.
The two sides agree that the chest scans are “reasonably and periodically necessary” for smokers 55 to 74 with at least a 30 pack-year history. They disagree on the rest of the smokers in the lawsuit.
Since the case was filed in 2006, insurers have begun to cover the screenings for certain smokers. Last year, Medicare announced it would pay for annual screenings for beneficiaries 55 to 77 with at least a 30 pack-year history.
U.S. District Judge Denise Casper rejected a request to exclude evidence about insurers agreeing to pay for three-dimensional chest scans, but said she’ll instruct jurors that they are not allowed to consider whether any of the smokers have insurance coverage for screening.
“The fact that insurance now covers it and it’s recognized for certain groups as being efficacious may have some evidentiary value in the case, but it does not change the fact that Philip Morris could be liable for the cost of the scans,” said Christopher Weld, an attorney for the smokers.
The Associated Press contributed to this article.
2nd hand smoke gave my dad cancer, but he did smoke cigars Infreq after leaving office.
Died in May 2013.
So Yes, tobacco & cigar producers should cover Cancer screenings & Chemo related to smoking orientated cancer.
Just because tobacco products are the most common cause of lung cancer doesn’t mean everyone who gets lung cancer got it from someone’s smoke. And most of the hazards cigarettes bring come from 20th-century processing techniques, not the tobacco itself. And not only are the screening THEMSELVES a carcinogen, but such intensive screenings for other cancers have turned up many false positives and resulted in expensive, debilitating treatments for tumors that likely never would have matured into a threat if left alone.
OH! What a crock of bull about second hand smoke,I use to smoke 3paks of
{kools} a day.I quit in {1995]. I NEVER PICKED another Cig.up again.I was a banquet,wedding
coordinator ,and bartender for the next (25)yrs.I worked in cigarette smoke filled places all my life.
I worked with, many a women&men.side by side,and some smoked to,but the second hand smoke
theory, came from Government Studies{like I trust them}I watched alot of people die from lung,
throat,colon,and pancreas cancers,but to say cigarettes and second hand smoke caused them
{poo,poo}.Most of these people didn’t smoke,I knew them.Now!! second hand smoke is only a problem,if you already have an upper respiratory problem,,as for smoking cigarettes,
You Know what the Risks are,so Quit. NO!NO! cigarette companies should not put one penny out for medical expenses..it’s on the cigarette pack in big letters.>>May Cause Cancer!! been on there for 30yrs or more…People are always putting the blame on the Companies..
take responsibility for your own health,OWN UP TO IT…
I believe that, “No One”, forced anyone to Smoke. Any Tonacco product put in the market at any time.
Remember This is Ametica, and Every Citizen had a Right to do as he wishes with that life.
So if You smoke if Your own free will , then as the Saying goes , one must pay the Piper.
I had Famy members that Smoked a lot of Years and they did not Die because they used Tonacco products .!!
Also their deaths were not connected to any way to Tobacco.
Yea!Yea! Bill..you said a mouthful..
When do you think adults will have to start taking responsibility for their own actions?
When either Big Gov declares bankruptcy or an EMP blasts them into the stone age. Maybe.
Cigarette packs and print ads have carried warnings for years about the dangers of using cigarettes. Those who started smoking after the early 1970s knew what they were getting into when they started. In the late 1980s or early 1990s the tobacco trials pretty much settled that the tobacco companies knew their products destroyed the health of smokers even though they publicly denied the claims. People who have continued to smoke bear the responsibility for their choice. If they want to continue to smoke they should pay for the test out of their own pocket.
In the 1990s the tobacco companies agreed to a per pack surcharge with the proceeds going to states. Maybe the states should use some of the tobacco settlement money to pay for these tests.
My mom and dad smoked for years. Mom
Had ten kids nursed all but three and smoked
With all of the seven. Sometimes two packs per day. She died at eighty five yrs. Dad died at ninety. We are all healthy. Mom died of heart attack. Dad did develope cancer of the lungs. But it was diagnosed two months before he died. He died from surgery trying to remove the cancer.